Garcia v. Watts et al
| Alvaro R. Garcia |
| Harrell Watts, D. Scott Dodrill, G. Molusur, John Doe, Jane Doe, James Cross, Jerry Martinez, Rocky Dowd, Thomas Gomez, Lamine N'Diaye, Rufus Willaims, Ortiz, Rina Desai, Jay Airres, Mrs. Pearson, Wade Jones, S. Gregg, A. Galleta, Hector Suarez, Adler Caneles, Fernando Gonzales, Raymond Burgos, L. Hicks, Joel Rodriguez, Federal Defenders of New York, Inc. and Michael Weis |
| 1:2008cv07778 |
| September 5, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Henry B. Pitman |
| Jed S. Rakoff |
| None |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
105
OPINION AND ORDER: re: 92 MOTION for Summary Judgment. filed by L. Hicks, Hector Suarez. Accordingly, for all the foregoing reasons, the defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 2/15/2013) Copies Sent By Chambers. (djc)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER : for 50 Report and Recommendation re: 6 Motion to Dismiss. Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts the Report, and, for the reasons stated therein, grants the motion of Weil and the Federal Defenders in its entirety. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close entry number 6 on the docket for this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff on 9/1/2009) (tve)
|
|
Filing
50
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Accordingly, for all the foregoing reasons, I respectfully recommend that the defendants' motion to dismiss all claims against the defendants in their official capacities be granted. I also recommend that Your Honor dismiss plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims and plaintiff's First Amendment claims with respect to the allegedly retaliatory cell search and plaintiff's placement in the SHU. Finally, I recommend that defendants' motion to dismiss all claims against defendants Sadowski, Desai, Cross, Gregg, Hicks, and Ortiz, for lack of personal involvement, be granted. Defendants motion to dismiss plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Dodrill and Watts for lack of person al involvement should also be granted. If this Report and Recommendation is accepted in its entirety it will result in the dismissal of all of plaintiff's claims except plaintiff's Due Process claims against Dodrill and Watts and plaintiff& #039;s claims against Suarez, Arries, Burgos, Dowd, Martinez, Pearson, Gomez, N'Diaye, Wade-Jones, Williams, and John/Jane Doe20 that his First Amendment rights and his Due Process rights were violated by the sanction he received for attempting to contact his attorney during computer class. Objections to R&R due by 9/14/2009 (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 8/27/2009) Copies Mailed By Chambers.(jpo)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
